Angelology

“Rudolf Steiner, the man who gave Madame Blavatsky a run for her money, invented many new “traditions”. Waldorf schools are based on his teachings. Bio Dynamic farming is entirely his doing. Steiner believed stuffing a cow horn with manure and tinctures that was buried for a year then dug up and the resulting slime sprinkled about a plot of land, the land would produce heartier crops…”
Amusing article;

10 comments

A really entertaining article, covering such widely different perspectives in a few words. I’m frequently surprised by those I come across who claim some form of angelic experience or interest. Sorry to disappoint, but I reckon my angel has been having a good rest for some years now. As something of a sceptic, all of this raises the interesting question of whether angels may live in another dimension and how they may be contacted or experienced. While I haven’t managed this myself, I picked up an interesting book some time ago: “Angels” by Jane Williams. Lots of illustrations and intriguing information. Published in 2006, it is more recent than some sources.

Ha ha both of you David and Jim claim to be sceptics when it comes to angels.
I couldn’t believe angelology was a real word until I looked it up; Bruce Uhrmacher used it to describe Steiner’s worldview and it turns out to be a branch of theology. It kind of trips off the tongue when you’ve had a glass or two…
David your only coherent comment to date is this one on angelology so I am grateful for that at least. If I had an angel it would get on my nerves for sure, and as for contacting them perhaps one day Dr Who will find them in that other dimension you long for.

I suppose my response to Helen’s remark arose from the (for me) intriguing and surprising experience that people refer to angels. As this has tended to happen in quite “ordinary” circumstances I’m prompted to reflect in quite new and unexpected ways. Clearly, there is a quite broad literature and a lively debate.

Interestingly, my mother also had glaucoma. Having lost the sight in one eye, she would have lost some of her visual field. We never discussed her problem but Jim’s response makes me wonder whether people who have lost visual capacity may have distinctive experiences. I don’t know of any experiments and wonder whether expectation or creativity may play some part. Sometimes it can be quite difficult to evaluate or “second-guess” what other people experience or believe. In social scientific research I suppose that such matters would fall within ethics and are notoriously difficult for researchers.

As you may guess, coherence is an important matter for me, closely allied to logic. I’m slightly surprised that my angiology response has been seen as coherent in view of my evident lack of insight and knowledge. Over the years, I have cultivated the activity of listening as an art. Drawn from everyday life, my responses on angiology may have been inspired by exercising that discipline in social situations. Clearly, I can make no claim to scientific validity.

I note that there may have been responses to my incoherent comments on another thread. I will respond later.

David, can I call you Mr Collins?
I suppose we should be grateful to have you as our resident anthroposophist here at the moment; it does provide an illustration of the way anthroposophy affects the mind.

Anthroposophy

Anthroposophy is a self-development course, based on the reincarnation of the soul, from black to aryan, through the actions of karma via the clairvoyant vision of Rudolf Steiner.
Everything else - the food, the banking, the schools, the medicine only exist to support and further the above.
- Anon

Follow Blog via Email

Search this site

From Waldorf watch; Roger Rawlings says on the claim “We do not teach anthroposophy”

“For a moment, let’s accept this disclaimer. How reassuring do you find it? Consider this analogy. Imagine a school that says, “All of our methods are based on voodoo. However, we do not teach voodoo to the children.” Would you be reassured? Would you send your child there?”